2017/1 – Mondi della vita, rete, trasformazioni del diritto

Mentre si pongono di fronte alla scienza giuridica e alla riflessione giusfilosofica come una sfida di enormi proporzioni, le reti telematiche impongono, al tempo stesso, una revisione critica di alcune categorie tradizionali. Ciò ha avuto, peraltro, un diretto impatto al livello del dibattito fra diversi orientamenti dottrinari in teoria generale del diritto.
Ad esempio, una serie di presupposti impliciti o espliciti necessari al giuspositivismo – di natura a volte logica e a volte politica, talora inerenti alla filosofia dell’azione e talora inerenti la dogmatica – si sono rivelati decisamente problematici: basti pensare all’erosione del ruolo dello Stato- nazione come protagonista indiscusso della politica e degli indirizzi istituzionali volti a regolamentare la vita associata degli individui.
Su un altro versante, se i problemi giuridicamente rilevanti connessi alle reti telematiche sembrano, per certi versi, aver irrobustito le prospettive di orientamento giusrealista, portando in evidenza il ruolo delle beliefs in ogni forma di diritto, d’altra parte – con buona pace di ogni speranza di autoregolamentazione giuridica sulla base delle credenze condivise nelle reti – restano aperti i dilemmi collegati al ruolo della forza organizzata nella costituzione dei fenomeni giuridici in generale (cfr. Gf. Zanetti 2001).
Pertanto se il fenomeno della complessificazione (B. Pastore 2014) rappresenta ormai un orizzonte inevitabile per chi studia il diritto e i fenomeni giuridici ciò vale, in maniera costitutiva, per chi assume il cyberspazio come ambito di indagine, cercando – alla maniera di Lawrence Lessig – di interrogarsi sulle sue possibili forme di regolazione.

Sommario: 1. “Lex informatica” e “social network”. – 2. “Lex informatica” e sovranità digitale. – 3. “Lex informatica” e fonti del diritto.

English Abstract: ‘Lex informatica’ is an expression referring to technical choices that impose certain behaviours upon web users. It includes both the establishment of specific rules for the flow of digital information upon the Web, and the possibility to impose procedural limitations upon said flow. The Web becomes simultaneously centralized and decentralized, it adapts and repolarizes itself in infinite variations, eluding territories, structuring immaterial confines within global space. The expression “Code is law” denotes that technological architectures of the internet contain self-organizing codes and regulatory languages that establish and control the rules of access to the digital content of the Web.

Sommario: Premessa. Sul carattere contestuale delle teorie del diritto. – 1. La proposta liberale della libertà di espressione. – 2. Internet e il ripensamento dello spazio pubblico. – 3. Discorso d’odio e modelli di democrazia.

English Abstract: The historical nature of rights leads to the necessary contextualization of the justifications and conditions of the exercise of the rights. In the case of freedom of expression, the context is determined, among other elements, by internet and hate speech. It is about two realities – where individual and group vulnerability becomes more evident – which force to reformulate fundamental aspects of the legal regulation of freedom of expression, as well as to wonder how far the legal response can always be considered as the most appropriate. Moreover, it is crucial to question the distinction between different models of democracy, on the basis of the major or minor extent of freedom of expression edges.

Sommario: 1. La “privacy” nella cultura giuridica, ieri e oggi. – 2. Le virtù. – 3. I vizi. – 4. Esiti paradossali. – 5. Proposte per un (ri)bilanciamento degli interessi … – 6. …e politiche alternative.

English Abstract: Legal culture has played a significant role in the success and development of the right to privacy and its dissemination. However, it has also led in some cases to an overstatement of this right to the detriment of other constitutionally protected interests. As a result, it is necessary to carry out a careful balancing test and to adopt public policies designed to respond in alternative ways to the right to privacy in order to avoid paradoxical outcomes where protection has a detrimental effect on the vulnerable person it was intended to protect.

Sommario: 1. Dimenticare Barbablù. – 2. Tra riservatezza e identità personale: vicissitudini giurisprudenziali del diritto all’oblio. – 3. Google “judex in causa sua”.

English Abstract: The paper proposes some reflections about the so-called “right to be forgotten” or “right to oblivion” (“diritto all’oblio”). Starting with a concise history of the concept, the author investigates the different meanings of the term in Italian law system. This right is a hybrid between the right to privacy (and to personal data protection) and the right to a correct representation of one’s own social image (i.e. personal identity). Then, the essay focuses on the judgment stated by the European Court of Justice (s.c. Google Spain case). With regard to the “right to be forgotten”, the Court concluded that the operator of a search engine is obliged to remove from the list of results displayed following a search made on the basis of a person’s name links to web pages, published by third parties and containing information relating to that person, also in a case where that name or information is not erased beforehand or simultaneously from those web pages, and even when its publication in itself on those pages is lawful. The interest of the general public in having access to the information in question must be balanced with fundamental rights to privacy and personal identity. The real – and unsolved – problem is: who will decide whether the request to delete data should be denied? Google is the right answer?

Sommario: 1. Premessa: spazio fisico e spazio virtuale. – 2. Dati informatici, valore e vulnerabilità. – 3. Design e protezione dei dati nello spazio virtuale.

English Abstract: As can be appreciated from the numerous threats to data stored, processed, and sent across cyberspace, digital data are a valuable resource. The most visible threat is cybercrime, but it is the inherently fragile nature of digital data that makes us vulnerable. What exposes people to risk – witness profiling and surveillance, and online reputational damage – is the constant interaction between the virtual and the real, coupled with a lack of computational transparency and the information asymmetry between those who use digital technologies and those who control them. Neutrality and transparency must be protected by law if we are to have inclusive cybersecurity and data protection, making sure that people are secure not only their physical surroundings but also in virtual space.